TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (6) TMI 372
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellant. Shri A.K. Roy, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. -  The first appellant was a manufacturer of Cable Filling Compound. They paid duty on this compound at rates applicable under chapter sub-heading 3824.90 of the Central Excise Tariff. Simultaneously, they were availing themselves of Modvat benefit in respect of several items, purportedly going int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of the assessee is that the finding regarding non-use of certain inputs is erroneous and it has been reached without considering relevant materials and following just procedure. During the hearing of the case, learned Senior Counsel representing the appellant pointed out that the main evidence relied on by the Revenue is a test report of the Central Revenue Control Laboratory. This report rela....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered by him. Nor were experts examined or cross-examined to get reliable expert opinion. Not even the Chemical Examiner of the Central Revenue Control Laboratory, who carried out the test and signed the test report was examined or offered for cross-examination. The learned Senior Counsel has submitted that in these circumstances, the matter is required to go back to the original authority for a pr....